Hi there, I'm buying my first digital SLR and after being convinced by several internet articles about the (lack of) necessity of 10 Megapixels have decided to go for the more affordable Nikon D40 camera.

I am buying the camera in Japan (hence the katakana Japanese spelling in the post subject) and have the choice between two kits...

My question is, is it worth paying the extra yen for the zoom lens, or- being a beginner- should I just buy the basic lens kit now and then buy a better zoom lens once I have mastered the initial lens. I suppose the answer rests a bit on how good the zoom lens in the kit is. Any ideas?

There is a new Nikon 55-200mm VR (with image stabilization) out!
My advice: don't take a tele-zoom without image-stab. If you can't efford it immediatele. just start with the basic zoom, add the tele later!

And I've just had a crisis of confidence! Several people at my workplace (my camera dilemma has brought us to a standstill :p ) swear that I should buy the "Canon EOS Kiss", which is the 400D. I was also looking at this before, and have a Canon IXY 550 which I love.

I am new to SLRs but would like something that will stand the test of time, have good potential for upgrading, and is general good for learning and growing as a photographer. I know you have detailed reviews Gordon, but basically, which should I buy!?

Yeah I'd like to go to Koya san sometime soon. Getting back onto the Canon 400D (XTi) vs Nikon D40 debate, I've been searching the net and there seem to be several heated debates as to which is better. And I still can't decide!!

The best way to solve your dilemma is to focus on the main diferences between the two cameras:
- autofocus - do you think you will need to buy some of the lenses that do not autofocus on the D40? Nikon will probably introduce AFS primes this year but the third-party manufacturers (who sell cheaper lenses) will need some time to put focus motors in their Nikon-mount lenses
- 10 megapixels vs. 6 - several reviews on the net suggested that the D40 might have a weaker AA filter and thus the pictures are a bit sharper that past cameras using the same (or similar) sensor. Also, D40 high ISO pictures have a little less (chroma) noise. On the other hand 10 megapixels give you more choice for cropping.
- handling - how does the camera fit in your hand, how fast/easy can you change the settings, etc. - for this you need to go to a camera shop and try both cameras

If you do choose the D40 I'd strongly recommend getting the new 55-200 VR lens.

Thanks for all your comments and advice. Price is not an option between the two choices, so its really about which one I prefer. At first I was easily drawn by the 10 megapixels, but the more I read the more I realised this vs 6MP isn't such a big deal at all. Like you say, the camera is a base for future lens purchases, but I am also keen to get one that is rated in its own right, with its package lens (which to be honest I will not have the funds to upgrade for some time). In this respect the Canon 400D seems to have come in for some criticism.

Clearly both are good choices and both will deliver good results. Does having onto 3 focal points limit the Nikon at all? I am not sure how this impacts on pictures unless they are particularly busy? I am primarily interested in travel photography- landscapes, but also city scenes, close ups of people as well as places. I am leaning towards the Nikon still but like many people have said once I actually hold them both and get a feel for them I'm sure the choice will become much easier.